First Turn Arty - Again

[LiveNoMore]

Hi All!

 

I know this has been discussed before, but I would like to bring it up again. Get a better perspective on how everyone feels about it and uses it.

My issue is with the defender having artillery on the first turn. Does he really know exactly when his opponent is going to attack? Or does he prepare for an attack and then react to it? The way first turn arty is now set up each side has the ability to call in strikes before the battle begins!  And yes, the opponents can make an agreement not to call in first turn arty, but I don't understand why it hasn't been built into the game. If a scenario editor tries to limit the defenders use of arty on the first turn by taking it out of inventory and making it the first reinforcement, that takes away the defenders use until at least the 10 minute mark. (First reinforcements can not be programmed to arrive before 5 minutes and then there is the wait time for rounds to arrive).

 

I'd like to see the following;

Defenders can not program arty until turn 2.

Meeting engagements and Probe; neither side can program arty until turn 2 OR an enemy has been spotted

 

Battlefront has created a great game and game engine and it shouldn't be that difficult to code these restrictions into it. I think it might be more of not realizing the number of players who would like to see this.

So what does everyone think? Is this something that we all would be interested in? or is it just something that bugs a few of us and not of great concern to everyone else?

 

Thanks

 

LiveNoMore

 

[Michael Emrys]

First turn arty for the attacker makes perfect sense, since most attacks began with some kind of bombardment to shake up and suppress the defender. So no problem there.

First turn arty by the defender is a different story but still defendable, I think. It was not easy to organize an attack without giving any indication of what was in the wind, especially if noisy tanks were involved. It would make sense for the defender to shoot up locations where an attacker was massing his forces or known choke points that he would have to move through. In the game, as an attacker—which is how I usually play—I find the defender's first turn bombardments a nuisance and sometimes an inconvenience but usually no more than that. I simply wait a turn or two to see where he commits his arty and then avoid those spots. If the defender were forced to wait a couple of turns before he could fire his guns, it would only mean that I would have to wait a couple of extra turns before I could know where it was safe to move, and that would really start to annoy me.

Michael

[A Canadian Cat]

Ah but if the defender is targeting known choke points and you are waiting to see where they target, one question springs to mind: Why aren't they just bombing the heck out of your setup area?  The problem with first turn bombardment by the defender when speaking of CM is you you cannot choose, as the attacker, to not be in your setup zone on the first turn.  You can choose your timing anywhere else on the map but you cannot choose to not be in the setup zone on turn one.  Not a huge problem with some scenarios where there is a large setup zone but there are many with a small setup zone. It is best to play with people that can agree to simple things like not bombing the attacker's setup zone on turn one.

[MikeyD]

With the (relatively) new 'harrass' command you can pretty effectively deny the opponent terrain without blasting through all your ammo at once. A lot of artillery fire back-in-the-day was unspotted area denial fire by coordinates. If you don't want to do initial barrage you can purchase a TRP to speed up reaction times and fire outside of LOS.

Edited December 8, 2016 by MikeyD

[IICptMillerII]

I agree with @IanL For the most part house rules should be established between players. Some form of agreement for the defender not to use artillery on the attackers set up zone on the first turn. 

The problem with coding in a rule where the defender cannot use artillery on the first round is that while 9 times out of 10 the defender probably should not use artillery on the first round, there is that one time where its totally acceptable/plausible/fitting with the mission. As an example, think of a campaign mission where you are the defender getting ready to defend a prepared position against a known attack. Thats an instance I can think of off the top of my head where it would be thematically appropriate to the mission for the defender to call in harassing fires on the first turn. I'm worried that some kind of blanket ban mechanic would hurt gameplay in the long run instead of making it better. Essentially I would rather be entrusted with the option and responsibility of being able to call in first turn artillery, and to know when not to, than to have an arbitrary game mechanic deciding it for me. Not to get political here, but the whole, "with freedom comes responsibility" thing comes into play here for me. The more options the player has the better, in my opinion. 

[Bob Willett]

I agree with LiveNoMore.  For battles where the attacker is making a surprise attack the defender should not already have artillery coming down on the first few turns especially when both sides do not begin the battle already in the LOS of each other.  Custom scenario designers are denied that opportunity to truly have a "surprise attack" when they want to have the attacker be the only one to have artillery on the first turns under the current system.  Opposing players shouldn't have to make side agreements before the battles begin to add this element of surprise to the battle for the attacker or to keep the defender from bombarding the set-up areas on the first couple of turns when hopefully this element can be added to the make-up of this already near-perfect-realistic wargame by the game designers.  We will continue to make these agreements in FTF or PBEM battles until hopefully this feature can be added into the game so even the AI will eventually agree to this rule change!. 

[Bulletpoint]

I think the biggest problem with attack/defence artillery is that every player seems to have his own interpretation of what you can and cannot do.

For example, my only personal rule is that as a defender, I will never fire into the attacker's setup zone, not even late into the game, because the thin setup zone usually represents miles of countryside behind the front where the attacker could have placed his assets.

But I've played against people who say neither player may fire artillery on the first turn, and even some people who chose to not use their artillery (and air power) at all, even though they had it in the particular scenario.

[Michael Emrys]

10 hours ago, IanL said:

It is best to play with people that can agree to simple things like not bombing the attacker's setup zone on turn one.

Precisely. In any case, the attacker's setup zone does not show up on the defender's map, so a certain amount of guesswork would be involved. And if one is playing against the AI, it is prohibited from shelling the SUZ by its programming.

Michael

[Doug Williams]

On ‎12‎/‎8‎/‎2016 at 5:14 PM, IanL said:

It is best to play with people that can agree to simple things like not bombing the attacker's setup zone on turn one.

Pretty much this.

Interestingly, a similar thread recently came up on the Few Good Men forums.

My personal "house rules" regarding this are:

No pre-planned arty (even with a delay) or TRPs for either side in a meeting engagement.

No pre-planned arty (even with a delay) for the defender in a probe/attack/assault.

Pre-planned arty (even arty landing on the first turn) is fine for the attacker in a probe/attack/assault.

 

Always remember to discuss house rules when you are playing an opponent for the first time, as opinions differ. For example, I recently played in a tourney where my 2nd round opponent used turn one arty in a meeting engagement (not in my setup zone, but still.....). I had forgotten to discuss "house rules" with him before we started, so that's on me.

 

 

 

[LiveNoMore]

Thanks for the input all!

Doug, your "house rules" are what I would like to see coded into the game.

Michael, I can not imagine a defender who had the ammo necessary to continually bomb an area just because he though it would be a likely avenue to attack, unless he had really good info that the attack was about to happen. However, I also have been known to hide until I think the defenders first turn arty is done, but that also leaves you vulnerable to the defender also planning the 5 minute delay bombardment!

With the widespread difference of opinions, maybe give the scenario designed the option to deny it or allow it. 

In a scenario I am working on now I have come up with a workable solution. I am placing all the defenders on board mortars in a vehicle that is placed in a non-set up spot. In this way the player will have to command them to exit the vehicle and deploy the weapon the first turn. It allows the defender to plot his bombardments with a quicker arrival time then having to wait until the first allowable reinforcement at 5 minutes.

We'll see how it works!